Pages

Monday, December 23, 2013

United States v. Cowan case brief

United States v. Cowan case brief summary
524 F.2d 504 (1975)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Appellant United States challenged the
denial of its Fed. R. Crim. P. 48(a) motion to dismiss an
indictment against defendants, set for trial, by the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas, based on a plea
bargain. Appellant also challenged the appointment of appellee
special prosecutors by the trial court under 28 U.S.C.S. §
1291 and, in the alternative, sought a writ of mandamus to
require dismissal.

CASE FACTSAs a part of a plea bargain with the
Watergate Special Prosecution Force that included the dismissal of
indictments in a Texas case, defendant A agreed to plead guilty to a
single charge filed in the District of Columbia in exchange for his
cooperation. Thereafter, defendant A and B's' legal counsel joined
appellant United States in a motion, under Fed. R. Crim. P.
48(a), to dismiss the Texas indictments before the district court in
accordance with each defendant's plea agreement. The district court
denied the motion to dismiss the indictment against defendant A. When
the United States filed its notice of intent not to prosecute, the
district court appointed private special prosecutors.

DISCUSSION

On appeal, the
case was reversed and remanded with directions to sustain the motion
to dismiss.

The court concluded that it was within the province of
the two prosecutorial arms of the government to weigh the relative
importance of two separate prosecutions in two separate districts and
dispose of them as practical considerations dictated.

Nothing in the
record overcame the presumption that the United States did so in good
faith for substantial reasons sufficiently articulated in the motion.

CONCLUSIONThe order that denied appellant United
States' motion to dismiss an indictment was reversed and the case was
remanded with directions to sustain the motion to dismiss. The court
concluded that the considerations which prompted the district court
to overrule the motion to dismiss were legally insufficient to
overcome the presumption of the government's good faith and establish
its betrayal of the public interest.

No comments:

Post a Comment

ShareThis

.

I have often tried to make the cases available as links in case you are a student without a textbook.

All the information on this site is constantly updated and edited. Furthermore, if you have any outlines you want to share, so that others, free of charge, may benefit, please send those to be posted here. Likewise, if you have case briefs you would like to share, please send them to [email protected].

Please keep in mind that this site makes no warranties as to the accuracy of the cases listed here or the current status of law. These cases are derived from class notes and laws change over time. If you have any questions about these materials, or any other legal questions, you should consult an attorney who is a member of the bar of the state you reside in.